Previously, I wrote on the inevitability of religion for all individuals, noting that all persons must inescapably live according to certain principles. The biblical foundation is that man, being created in the image and likeness of God as Scripture says, is innately a religious creature. Thus, all persons are religious by nature. Man either worships or blasphemes (Romans 1). If that is true—and it most certainly is—then, among other things that follow, there must necessarily be an inevitable, religious component to education.
Dr. Joe Boot of the Ezra Institute agrees saying,
The [state] classroom today is the new pulpit; the curriculum [is] the new Bible… the state educators are the new priesthood. State education becomes the new cure-all for sin, crime, emotional and mental health problems… it basically means social salvation through education.
Joe Boot
Objection
At this point, an objection is made: “I am a teacher at school x and we teach a broad range of subjects, including religions a, b, and c; therefore, I do no harm. I simply allow the students to freely choose apart from bias.” And within this objection is the notion that the realm of the secular is somehow neutral, that the teacher is neutral, and that the students are neutral. That’s a convenient idea. But it’s not reality.
Granted, it is important to understand other ideas. But from what starting point? The Christian starts with God and His Word. So while it can be helpful to understand the errors of pagan religions from an apologetic standpoint, it does not follow that one can simply teach on all religions from a pretended position of religious neutrality. There’s no such thing.
Atheists love to feign humility at this point, as if like leprechauns they simply follow the evidence-rainbow wherever it might happen to lead. But they won’t tell you that their entire worldview is inconsistent, that they must borrow from Christianity, or that they have set themselves up as judge and jury in all matters of reality. Most significantly, they won’t tell you that leprechauns are a fiction. I digress.
Noting the hairy problem of the religious pluralism above, the truth is that secularism is itself a religion, namely the religion of irreligion. Again, this must necessarily follow based upon the created nature of mankind. Basic philosophy necessitates this as well.
Confirmation of the religious component of education can be found in T. S. Elliot when he said, “We derive our theory of education from our philosophy of life. The problem turns out to be a religious problem.”
Necessary Consequences
Again, this must follow from religious inevitability.
There can be no question as to whether an individual will teach from a religious standpoint—he will. The question is what religious standpoint. There is no if. There is only what. And there is only what because man is religious by nature.
If you think this approach is overly simplistic or dogmatically black-and-white, I encourage you to consider whether the morbidizing grey of postmodernism has clouded your mind from recognizing that, believe it or not, there is, in fact, a sun shining in the sky at midday, regardless of whether you presently see it or not.
For the Christian, there is only one true God: the God of Scripture; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is His law, His gospel, and His whole counsel which must be taught. It is His Word that is final. It is reality as defined by Him that man must live in. Everything else is a cowering fantasy.
Man will either worship or blaspheme.
This includes the realm of education.
So what are you teaching? And what are you being taught?